Tsham v Road Accident Fund

The plaintiff, Mr Mziwakhe Emmanuel Tsham, was severely injured in a motor vehicle accident on 9 November 2020 in Gqeberha. He instituted a claim for damages against the Road Accident Fund (RAF) under the Road Accident Fund Act 56 of 1996. The RAF initially denied knowledge of the accident and later denied that the plaintiff had complied with the statutory requirements for lodging a valid claim. It was common cause that the plaintiff submitted a fully completed RAF 1 form and supporting documents by registered mail on 29 September 2022. More than a year later, and after summons had been issued, the RAF objected to the validity of the claim relying on Board Notice 271 of 2022 and alleging missing medico-legal and medical expense documentation. The parties separated the issue of statutory compliance from the merits and quantum of the claim.

The RAF’s defence of non-compliance was dismissed with costs. The RAF was declared liable for 100% of the damages the plaintiff can prove arising from the accident. All remaining issues were postponed sine die, and the RAF was ordered to pay the plaintiff’s costs relating to the separated issue, including counsel’s fees and interest.

The judgment reinforces the strict operation of section 24(5) of the Road Accident Fund Act, confirming that late objections to the validity of RAF claims are ineffective. It also affirms that the RAF cannot rely on Board Notice 271 of 2022 following its being declared unlawful, thereby protecting claimants from administrative overreach and uncertainty in claim lodgement requirements.